Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances housing package: land use amendments, housing plan reporting and density incentives win approval
Summary
A package of housing measures moved through the Utah Senate, including local land-use amendments, a broad housing implementation bill requiring GOPB reports and density-bonus tools, and a concurrent resolution supporting streamlined housing policies.
Senators approved a set of housing bills and a concurrent resolution on March 7 that sponsors described as the result of the state auditor's interim review and a year of stakeholder work.
Senator Fillmore, sponsor of several items, said the package flowed from the Commission on Housing Affordability and involved stakeholders including the Property Rights Coalition, Realtors, the League of Cities and Towns, transit authorities and housing advocates. He said the measures were intended to reduce regulatory costs that affect homebuilding while preserving health and safety protections.
Key measures and outcomes: - Third substitute House Bill 3 68 (local land-use amendments): Sponsor Fillmore described this as part of a four-bill package implementing consensus changes from the Commission on Housing Affordability. It passed the Senate by roll call, 27 yea, 0 nay, 2 absent. - Fifth substitute House Bill 37 (Utah housing amendments): Sponsor Fillmore said the legislation implements recommendations from the legislative auditor and requires the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget (GOPB) to develop a housing plan and submit annual reports on implementation. It also authorizes municipalities to approve additional housing density in exchange for requirements and bonuses, revises moderate-income housing plan requirements and revises annual reporting. The fifth substitute passed 22 yea, 6 nay, 1 absent. - House Concurrent Resolution 14 (supporting streamlined Utah housing policies): A nonbinding resolution calling for streamlined approval policies and identifying programs/funding options passed the Senate, 24 yea, 5 nay.
Discussion highlights: Senator Fillmore credited significant stakeholder negotiation and emphasized that the package seeks to clarify existing law and codify best practices to reduce costs and streamline approval. Senator Harper asked whether changes affected Summit County; sponsor Fillmore responded that the fifth substitute did not include Summit-specific amendments.
Next steps: Bills that passed the Senate will be returned to the House for further consideration. The package includes GOPB reporting and implementation items that will require interagency coordination.
Speakers quoted below are drawn from the transcript and attributed to the first time they spoke on these items.
